The latest Reuters Poll Trend weighted average of Newspoll, Morgan and ACNielsen results has federal Labor with a two-party lead of 55.8-44.2, presumably being weighed down a little by recent results from before the weekend.
UPDATE: Roy Morgan has joined in on the action with a small sample (546) phone poll including questions on leadership approval, which Morgan doesn’t normally do. It finds Malcolm Turnbull’s approval rating down to 25 per cent from 43 per cent in May, with his disapproval up a breathtaking 33.5 per cent to 62.5 per cent. Kevin Rudd’s approval rating on 63 per cent, up from 57.5 per cent in May, with his disapproval rating down from 33.5 per cent to 29 per cent. Labor holds leads of 56-44 on two-party preferred and 46 per cent to 39 per cent on the primary vote, which is actually quite mild by Morgan standards. Newspoll has also published its quarterly geographic and demographic breakdowns of recent polling by state, age, sex, and capitals/non-capitals.
Apart from that:
• Robert Taylor of The West Australian reports that Labor preselections for some highly winnable Liberal-held seats in Perth appear to be ”stitched up”. In the only two seats in the country which the Coalition gained from Labor in 2007, Cowan and Swan, those respectively named are Wanneroo mayor Jon Kelly and Slater & Gordon lawyer Tim Hammond. Kelly is interesting, as he ran as an independent against state Labor MP Margaret Quirk in Girrawheen at the 2005 election after a split in the Right faction. In Stirling, where decorated Iraq war veteran Peter Tinley failed to unseat current Shadow Workplace Relations Minister Michael Keenan in 2007, the nod is apparently set to be given to Karen Brown, former deputy editor of The West Australian and current chief-of-staff to Eric Ripper. Brown famously failed to win the new notionally Labor seat of Mount Lawley at the state election last September after suffering an 8 per cent swing, which many blamed on Alan Carpenter’s insistence that local member Bob Kucera make way for Brown. Peter Tinley is said to be holding out for a safe seat or a Senate position, and the unlikelihood of either suggests he will not be a starter at the next election. In Hasluck, which Sharryn Jackson recovered for Labor in 2007 after a term in the wilderness, Liberals are said by Taylor to be “working behind the scenes” to secure the endorsement of Mike Dean, who last week stepped down from his high-profile position as president of the Police Union.
• The ABC reports that Kathryn Hay will seek Labor preselection for Bass at next year’s state election. Hay is a former Miss Tasmania who became Tasmania’s first Aboriginal MP when elected at the age of 27 in 2002. After surprising everybody by dropping out at the 2006 election, Hay ran as an independent against Ivan Dean in the upper house seat of Windermere in May, and did very well to finish within 5 per cent of victory on the final count. With incumbent Jim Cox retiring, Michelle O’Byrne a sure bet for re-election, and Labor looking certain to win a second seat but very unlikely to pick up a third, the battle for the second seat is looking like a tussle between Hay, Beaconsfield mine disaster survivor Brant Webb, CFMEU forests division secretary Scott McLean (who famously came out in support of John Howard at the 2004 federal election) and Winnaleah school principal Brian Wightman, with only the latter looking an obvious also-ran.
• Rick Wallace of The Australian reports that George Seitz, western Melbourne Labor Right potentate and state Keilor MP, proposes to publish a “warts and all” account of his career in politics. Seitz is being forced out after nearly three decades in parliament due to a Victorian Ombudsman’s report which probed into the involvement of various state MPs in goings-on at Brimbank City Council. The aforementioned Wallace article is worth reading for a broader overview of the episode’s far-reaching impact on the Victorian ALP.
• Andrew Landeryou at VexNews reports that the closure of nominations has brought no challenges to sitting federal Liberal MPs in Victoria – including Kevin Andrews in Menzies, who was believed to be under threat from former Peter Reith staffer Ian Hanke.
• Nick in comments informs us that according to a Channel Nine news report, Labor polling has it trailing the Coalition 57-43 on NSW state voting intention.
2,238 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 45 » Show All
Steve Fielding has shown himself to be the village idiot of the Senate.
Look at his recent incompetent antics in the senate:
1) His decision to block referral to the privileges committee was only the second time in the Senate’s 108 years that this has happened.
2) His CC denials.
3) His willingness to potentially contaminate the Parliament with swine flu.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/lessons-from-ozcar-for-everyone-from-pm-to-senate-dunce-20090703-d7rg.html?page=-1
Yet he was elect to the Senate despite obtain just a couple of percent of prime votes. WHY? Because Labor preferenced him over the Greens.
Why is there such animosity between Labor and the Greens? (This has been on display in recent feuds on PB). I have always stated that there is a natural synergy between both. Labor will not always enjoy its present high standing in the polls. It will need Green preferences sometime in the future, just as it did in the 1990 election.
Just as the Liberals have not learnt the lessons of policy development since their 2007 defeat, so too Labor appears to ignore its natural synergies it may well need to maintain power into the future.
So a well intentioned dialogue needs to be opened up between Labor & the Greens.
Here on PB would be a good place to start.
Altho I can’t say that its well intentioned, there certainly is dialogue between different peoples , representing different political viewpoints, here on contentious issues.
At times there is a very frank and open discussion and perhaps because of the passion of those that post here, it does get a bit heated.
In the main, this seems to occur when an impasse is reached or the tone denigrates to personal attack.
But politics is about the hurly-burly and most certaintly not tip-toeing thru the tulips.
BTW
What, in your opinion, is the most pressing issue that the Labs and the Greens should be discussing.
“Why is there such animosity between Labor and the Greens?’ a not so simple mistake by labor it will not happen again, however payback for Fielding for stopping the senate inquiry will most likely be Lib preferences. now that is an even scarier thought
Re 252,
He repeatedly demonstrates this, this week wasn’t unusual in that regard
Juliem, what’s your reading of Palin’s latest announcement?
Don’t know if other WA posters made note of this yesterday, but the Friday edition of The West had an article by Andrew Probyn, Federal Political editor, titled “Rudd woos WA vote in poll dance”. Rudd was in Kununurra on Thursday (don’t know if his current trip to WA was a multi day trip or just TH). Anyways, to the point – Probyn points out the very real threat of a DD over the ETS legislation. Case #1 – if you accept the arguement that the Senate’s deferment of the ETS legislation was the first hurdle for a DD, if they vote against it again in the August sitting, GG under request could dissolve and have an early November election. Case #2 – Coalition votes it down in the August sitting, again at the end of the last sitting session for the year and then early election in March looms. Probyn presents both as viable possibilities but the latter being the more likely between the two.
Thoughts?
Annabel Crabb in the story referenced by BB at 251 did not mention that the conversation between Brandis Mason and the journalist Parris led to the introduction (by Parris) of the term dog whistling into the British political lexicon. http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/cartoons/13599/only-the-tories-can-cut-the-state-down-to-size.thtml
It is a lovely example of the propagation of a meme and I particularly like it as an example of Antipodean culture affecting the mother country.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/economy-beats-the-odds-20090703-d7um.html
This can be directly attributed to two towering genius of the two boys from Nambour.
The Superior Economic Manager will always be ALP under Labor
Possum or anyone as a newby how do I set up quoths from other bloggers if I wish to incluude them as a reference
Ta
vote1maxine @ 252
I think it’s a couple of steps worse than that. Village idiots can’t help being stupid.
But he knows the science is correct, and what he should be doing on climate change and everything else that the shady bible-bashing bastards behind him direct him on.
Being wilfully ignorant when you are in a position of that power is to piss on a heavy ethical obligation. So he’s just an unprincipled, dishonest, double-talking, empty shell mouthing the words of others. How does the creep live with himself?
Apologies to village idiots everywhere by the way. We should be using the modern term – ’synapse-challenged small town dweller’.
Palin looks like she quit to avoid further scandals coming out and being forced to resign in disgrace. She’s thrown in the towel.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/03/palin-hockey-arena-scandal/
Krugman looks at the jobless figures growing in the US and decides a bigger stimulus packages is needed ASAP. Otherwise the US will face a decade of deflation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/03/opinion/03krugman.html?em
Diogenes, echos of the Texas Ranges baseball field under Bush and co.
Excellent quote before Diogs. First they ignore, then they laugh, then they fight, then you win. What if they can’t laugh because it can be seen you are clearly too intelligent, and they can’t fight because you’d win legally, I suppose you go from; ignore – rejection – acceptance – win.
Anyway, Heyson Molotov did not make any personal attack. Get over it and lighten up you guys. For the record I like Green voters. I just happen to love their policies more.
Hmm …. wonder what is up here
….
Dio, you beat me to it
What a strange speech for a mid term Governor. All about lame ducks, no more politics as usual, children were polled and want her out. She loves her job and Alaska so much she’s leaving.
http://video.nytimes.com/video/playlist/politics/1194811622221/index.html#1194841338826
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25731562-5006301,00.html
Expectedly, Hamilton-Smith holds on to the SA Liberal leadership.
Bob good news for Labor supporters there, with Turnbull digging in and staying as a lame duck leader and Springborg leading the media hits over Langbroek, once Springborg rolls Langbroek we will be back to business as usual on the conservative side of Australian politics.
The vote was much closer than expected, 11 votes to 10, with one MP abstaining. The status quo, maintained by such a slim margin, is the worst possible result for the SA Liberals.
To be a little more fair to him you also have to lay the blame on the Opposition. His vote alone would be meaningless. Bob Brown was exactly right that the Senate should not be seen to be protecting one of its own. If there was no merit in the reference the committee could determine that itself and report accordingly.
To be fair to the ALP they issued their preferences in the way that they thought would get the ALP more senators. The ALP’s job is not to get Greens senators elected after all.
Bob, didn’t Hamilton-Smith initially get the job because the previous Liberal leader was interstate at a funeral when the spill occurred? He should be ok as leader as long as he has no intention of leaving the state for any reason between now and the next election.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25731562-5006301,00.html
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25731562-5006301,00.html
Bob, has he developed a travel bug since the vote this morning?
That post reminds me of the oft said “I’m not a Racist, but” tag. but you have made yet ANOTHER personal attack, and as a person with a disability, while I don’t take personal offence at your swipe at the mentally ill, your comments prove once and for all that the Greens take great delight at making personal attacks against ANYBODY who do not agree to your virtious views.
And if I had made a similar attack, I would’ve been snipped by William, and well deserved, but in yours and Oz’s case every attack of a similar nature remain untouched – rather like the endagered species the greens purport to protect.
So much for a Party who claim to protect the socially disadvantaged when they resort to attacking the peoiple they purport to protect.
Hypocrites.
253
In a future 1990 type election for the ALP, it may have to rely not only on Greens preferences but on Greens MHRs. In such a close election where the ALP was on the nose but not quite enough to get booted out, the Greens would be in a position to gain up to three seats (if they did not hold any of them already).
Here’s the story of the SA Liberal Leader being rolled while attending a funeral from Pavlov’s cat a local SA blogger.
http://pavlovblog.blogspot.com/2007/04/sa-libs-move-some-more-deck-chairs.html
276
I am sorry I’ve been reduced to a number
Ttfab.
What I meant in 253, was what issue is (eg ETS) the most pressing
the greens getting fed MHR’s in such a number to hold the BOP, is a possibility, but the probablility is debatable ie the timeline for it to actually happen.
Vote1Maxine says he/she wants a dialogue between Labor and Green and laments the feuding that goes on here between Labor and Green supporters. I agree in principle. But V1M then immediately drags up the Labor-preferenced-Fielding matter as a stick to hit Labor over the head with. As I’ve said here about 20 times, the current Senate election system forces all parties *including the Greens* to do preference deals. The deal with FF was the best way to maximise Labor’s chances of winning three Senate. The Democrats also did a deal with FF, for the same reason. If the deal had worked, everyone would have said how clever Eric Locke was, but thanks to Latham driving down the ALP primary vote, it didn’t work. These things happen in politics. I could compare this with the Qld Greens’ *deliberate* preferencing of the Nats in 1995 in order to help them win government, or the Green alliance with the Libs and Nats to prevent reform of the WA Leg Council, but in the interests of dialogue I’ll refrain from doing so. I for one would welcome a truce on this silly point-scoring (I can’t speak for fellow Labor hacks of course.)
More broadly, I think what really annoys Labor people, here and in the real world, is the Greens’ constant assertion that Labor governments are not really trying to deal with the incredibly complex and difficult issues surrounding environment, energy, water and climate change in Australia, and that the Greens could solve all these issues overnight. It’s very easy to be pure from the crossbenches, but Labor governments are dealing with these issues while trying not to put people out of work (the working-class people who vote for us in particular), send businesses broke or ruin our export industries, and all in the face of a hostile anti-Labor press. Government means responsibility for all these things, and it means constant difficult choices. It’s very easy to harvest votes through NIMBYism and opposition to everything governments do. Greens oppose the CPRS, nuclear power, desal plants, pipelines, windfarms – just about everything governments can or could do to deal with these problems, while dismissing all consequences for employment or investment, as “pandering to the big end of town.”
Secondly, war between Labor and Greens is inevitable if the Greens pursue a strategy of trying to win lower-house seats from Labor, federally and in the states. Of course as a political party the Greens are entitled to contest any seat they like, but if they insist on a strategy of trying to defeat Labor ministers (Tanner, Albanese, Plibersek; Pike, Wynne; Tebbutt, Firth), then we are going to fight back, and we will fight as rough as needs be. I point out that it’s not *necessary* for the Greens to pursue this strategy. Federally and in all states except Qld (and Tas, which has a different system), the Greens can win upper house seats, gaining a voice and influence by holding the balance of power, without threatening Labor’s electoral base and incurring the inevitable Labor counter-attack. The decision to “take on Labor” in seats like Marrickville and Melbourne is a decision to start a war with Labor, and the Greens can’t complain about the tactics which Labor then uses to defend itself – particularly since we see no comparable effort to take on the Liberals in their seats.
I hope V1M finds these comments, which are intended to be constructive, helpful.
They do it where they see the opportunity to. Mayo is one example.
I really thought the phrase had died out decades ago but listening to Bob Brown speak it appears not to have.
Why wouldn’t this have occurred before this morning’s vote?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/04/2616784.htm?section=justin
If he got 14 of the 22 votes as was speculated then he would have been ok. But he should have stepped down before it anyway as he’d lead the Libs to disaster. With 11 of 22 votes, he’s pretty much lost the party’s confidence. Especially if the person you only got 11 of 22 votes against was Vickie Chapman of all people. God she’s dumb.
Recommended reading Andrew Elder’s latest blog “Night Thoughts from John Hartigan”- great l’explication de texte.
http://andrewelder.blogspot.com
I thought that what political leaders did in a spill was phone everyone on their team asking for support and count the votes before it turned into a public embarrassment. What is the preferred SA method, it is obviously different and not as effective as eldewhere? The good thing is that with 21 members they can’t have a four all draw and go for a lucky dip as was the Queensland Liberals favorite trick.
Oops 22, I forgot the one hiding in the toilet.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/03/sarah-palin-out-of-politi_n_225619.html
It looks like Palin is quitting politics tout court, not as a preliminary to running for the Senate or for POTUS. I think this shows unexpected good sense. She is clearly out of her depth, and she has family problems.
The OO are still trying to get Rudd over the ute, talk about sore losers.
They also report that Malcolm saying
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25730651-2702,00.html
Vera, last time I checked the ute was declared on the register at the bottom of this page. It seems that News Ltd wants to run the line that the Howard Govt standards of accountability were superior. Good luck with that one, News Ltd.
http://www.openaustralia.org/mp/kevin_rudd/griffith
The registration, insurance and RACQ membership are also listed so what is their problem?
Steve, they hate being made fools of I guess
The head of the Repugs Governors’ Association Nick Ayers was sent emails by Palin before her announcement. Bloggers are to blame for the resigantion of a political leader – is this a first?”
Who else can we bloggers bring down from our newfound position of strength? We must use this new power responsibly of course!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/03/gop-official-who-talked-w_n_225582.html
(link courtesy ChrisB at 101)
Must be the superior research skills that makes Harto want us to pay for that blogs can dig up for free, I guess. After all the General Public couldn’t just click on Open Australia and get every Member and Senator’s declaration of Pecuniary Interests themselves could they?
279
The Greens are not targeting these seats because they have ministers in them but because they are the ones that the Greens can win. If the ALP does not want ministers targeted then they should move the ministers but instead they are making members for these seats new ministers. If the Libs had a major minister in say Eden-Monaro the ALP would still target that minister.
The lower houses are more powerful than the upper houses. On money bills there are restrictions in the Commonwealth and most states and in Victoria and NSW the Legislative Council can`t block any money bills (despite the Legislative Council being the more representative house in Victoria). Lower Houses also determine governments.
I suppose Hartigan’s reply to this would be that, yes, Joe Public could look up pecuniary interests for himself, but that eh didn’t do so.
But then, neither did News journalists.
Besides that, the donation was innocent, recorded properly and no benefit to Grant was gained by Grant’s making it.
So where’s the problem?
Same with the email. Except it was a fake email. So what’s the point of writing about it?
Ditto for the Schools bootstrapper: apart from the usual few stuffups you’d expect to find with a multi-billion dollar program, News’ famous journalistic team couldn’t dredge up anything much, even after their plaintive, daily cries for tip-offs from the public. Most of the articles were either quoting themselves or close colleagues (either specifically or in the form of words: “newspaper reports say…”), or Liberals, plus a few disaffected principals and P&C tragics. Well, that lot would say that, wouldn’t they? Hardly the stuff of huge controversy.
Gotta love the MSM- poll on yahoo7- can turnbull win back voters?- huh? did he have them in the first place?? I dont think so
And Sarah Palin, PLLLLLEASE go for president!!!!
I suppose Hartigan’s reply to this would be that, yes, Joe Public could look up pecuniary interests for himself, but that eh didn’t do so.
But then, neither did News journalists.
Besides that, the donation was innocent, recorded properly and no benefit to Grant was gained by Grant’s making it.
So where’s the problem?
Same with the email. Except it was a fake email. So what’s the point of writing about it?
Ditto for the Schools bootstrapper: apart from the usual few anomalies you’d expect to find with a multi-billion dollar program, News’ famous journalistic team couldn’t dredge up anything much, even after their plaintive, daily cries for tip-offs from the public. Most of the articles were either quoting themselves or close colleagues (either specifically or in the form of words: “newspaper reports say…”), or Liberals, plus a few disaffected principals and P&C tragics. Well, that lot would say that, wouldn’t they? The bulk of the “disasters” arose from barneys at the local level about what was the most appropriate priority for the particular school. Hardly the stuff of huge controversy.
I am sick of trying to second-guess the Crikey “Moderation filter”. Is “stuffup” a naughty word? I took it out and still copped the dreaded message.
I wonder if the conservative side of politics in the US is also trying the Silver Bullet/Great White Hope approach that has been so successful in conservative Australian politics recently…?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8133964.stm
Pages: « 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 45 » Show All